There are few pockets of bond funds that are doing well, but they are heavily overbought as @junkster mentioned. So watch for defaulting if and when recession strikes. For now short term T bills and CDs are still attractive, yielding 5.5%. We continue rolling over T bills as they mature.
@junkster, would treasury floating rate bonds be reasonable alternative to FR/BL funds?

@Sven, no not a reasonable alternative, Treasury floating rate bonds are up around 3.60% YTD while bank loan funds are up on average 8.89%. A couple bank loan funds are up over 11% and many are up over 10%. Since the last week in May a few bank loan funds have had but three down days. The epitome of trend persistence and the sector is on track for its second best year ever. Massively overbought but has been that way for some time now. When this category finally cracks will be looking elsewhere such as BDKAX which I mentioned at the beginning of July. New managers there took over last December and its performance has been more than impressive since. Then again, better to seek out under the radar funds that get no mention/attention on the boards,

There are few pockets of bond funds that are doing well, but they are heavily overbought as @junkster mentioned. So watch for defaulting if and when recession strikes. For now short term T bills and CDs are still attractive, yielding 5.5%. We continue rolling over T bills as they mature.
@junkster, would treasury floating rate bonds be reasonable alternative to FR/BL funds?

Same here in still staying almost entirely out of risk assets, with a twist in the last couple of months: trying to extend maturity in Treasuries I own to 1-2y at 5% or greater, and if 3y ever hits 5%, I'll be there too. For ultrashort maturity, it's funds, with a heavy lean toward floating rate, all but entirely investment grade.
Full disclosure about the T maturity extension: I have been accused (rightly) of thinking too far ahead at times.
So a new $100k now would prob'ly go about 50-50 into those two types of investment, maybe with a little kicker to the fairly small cash allocation at the moment. Actually that's pretty close to a real plan, with a chunk of T's maturing in the next month.

Here is a detail analysis on recycling EV’s lithium ion batteries. There are more components involved and thus add complexity than those of traditional smelting process for aluminum and steel.
https://nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1682-5

CDs at Schwab Brokerage are slowly seeing ongoing rate increases--some short term CDs are now at 5.6s, with most inching up above 5.4%. It is very encouraging for me personally, and anytime I get a "spare" $100k, it appears I will have some very attractive retirement options to consider. I do see some positives in a few bond oefs that I follow, but I am not quite ready to shift away from CD options for now.

I also track other Sentiment indicators. Last week, the AAII Sentiment was an outlier indicating notable improvement, but others remained negative or neutral. But THIS week's AAII Sentiment reading makes it clear that last week was a fluke.
Most Sentiments are now negative or neutral.
SENTIMENTS (9/9/23) (next update 9/16/23)
In hindsight, several sentiment indicators PEAKED around 7/20/23.
NYSE cumulative (5-day) A/D LINE fell; ratio of winners:losers 1:3.
AAII Bull-Bear Spread +12.6% (above average).
%Above 50-dMA for NYSE-listed stocks 36.25% (negative); Scale: oversold < 30, negative < 50, positive > 50, overbought > 70 (StockCharts $NYA50R; $SPXA50R for the SP500 is also included in the bottom panel)....
Delta MSI 52.6% (positive); Scale: oversold < 30, negative < 50, positive > 50, overbought > 70 (a proprietary index for %Above 75-dMA for selected 1,800 stocks). Unclear what day of the week it is released, but it seems to lag other sentiment indicators (Barron’s updates it on late-Fridays). The all-cap $NYA50R is typically closer to it than the large-cap $SPXA50R.

AAII Sentiment Survey, 9/13/23
NEUTRAL became the top sentiment (38.4%; above average) & bearish became the bottom sentiment (29.2%; below average); bullish became the middle sentiment (34.4%; below average); Bull-Bear Spread was +5.2% (below average). Investor concerns: Inflation (still high); economy; the Fed; dollar; crypto regulations; market volatility (VIX, VXN, MOVE); Russia-Ukraine war (81+ weeks, 2/24/22-now); geopolitical. For the Survey week (Th-Wed), stocks were mixed (cyclicals up, growth down), bonds up, oil up, gold down, dollar flat. Last week seems like a fluke. US FY24 starts on 10/1/23 but no deal yet in DC. #AAII #Sentiment #Markets
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1174/thread

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/711080/000168386323006232/f36172d1.htm
497 1 f36172d1.htm 497
TOUCHSTONE STRATEGIC TRUST
Touchstone Dynamic Allocation Fund (the “Target Fund”)
Supplement dated September 13, 2023, to the Fund’s Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”), each dated April 28, 2023, as may be amended or supplemented from time to time
IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE TARGET FUND
Proposed Reorganization
In supplements dated February 24, 2023 and March 14, 2023, the proposed conversion of the Target Fund, a mutual fund series of Touchstone Strategic Trust, from a mutual fund to an exchange-traded fund (an “ETF”) through the reorganization of the Target Fund into a newly-created ETF series of the Touchstone ETF Trust (the “Reorganization”), was announced. A Proxy Statement/Prospectus (the “Proxy Statement”) dated July 20, 2023, which contains more information regarding the Acquiring ETF (as defined below) and the Reorganization, was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), and was mailed to Target Fund shareholders of record as of June 30, 2023.
The newly-created ETF, Touchstone Dynamic International ETF, is proposed to serve as the acquiring fund in the Reorganization (the “Acquiring ETF” and together with the Target Fund, the “Funds”). A special meeting of shareholders of the Target Fund commenced on August 29, 2023 and was adjourned until October 2, 2023 (the “Special Meeting”), at which time shareholders of record of the Target Fund will vote on the proposal to approve the Reorganization of the Target Fund into the Acquiring ETF. The Reorganization is expected to be tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
Under the terms of the Agreement and Plan of Reorganization (the “Plan”), the Target Fund would transfer all of its assets to the Acquiring ETF in exchange for shares of the Acquiring ETF. The Acquiring ETF would also assume all of the Target Fund's liabilities. The shares of the Acquiring ETF would then be distributed to the Target Fund's shareholders, and the Target Fund would be terminated.
Prior to the Reorganization, any dividends paid by the Target Fund will be paid in accordance with the current dividend option of an account; accounts in which the dividend reinvestment option has been chosen will receive any dividends in the form of additional shares of the Target Fund.
The Target Fund's shareholders will be required to approve the Reorganization. If the Reorganization is approved at the Special Meeting and subject to additional conditions required by the Plan, the Reorganization is expected to be completed on or about October 20, 2023. Shareholders of the Target Fund will not pay any sales load, commission, or other similar fee in connection with the Acquiring ETF shares received in the Reorganization. Expenses associated with the Reorganization will be borne by Touchstone Advisors, Inc. (“Touchstone”).
In connection with the Reorganization, the Target Fund closed to new shareholders on May 15, 2023. Current Target Fund shareholders may continue to purchase shares of the Target Fund until September 29, 2023.
After the Reorganization, shareholders may only purchase or sell shares of the Acquiring ETF on a national securities exchange at prevailing market prices through a broker-dealer.
More Information About the Funds
Although the Target Fund and Acquiring ETF are similar in various ways, there are some differences. For example, the Acquiring ETF will have a different sub-adviser, principal investment strategies, risks, fees, and expenses than the Target Fund. The Acquiring ETF will also be subject to certain risks unique to operating as an ETF. A comparison of the investment policies, strategies, fees, expenses, and risks of the Target Fund and the Acquiring ETF are included in the Proxy Statement.
The Target Fund seeks to provide investors with capital appreciation as its investment goal. The Acquiring ETF also will seek to provide investors with capital appreciation as its investment goal. The principal investment strategies and principal risks for the Funds are similar, although they do differ in certain respects. The Target Fund is a “fund-of-funds” that invests in a diversified portfolio of fixed-income and equity oriented underlying funds. These underlying funds, in turn, invest in a variety of U.S. and foreign equity and fixed-income securities. The Acquiring ETF will invest, under normal circumstances, at least 80% of its assets in equity securities of non-U.S. companies. Touchstone serves as the investment adviser to the Target Fund and will also serve as the investment adviser to the Acquiring ETF. The Target Fund is sub-advised by Wilshire Associates Incorporated (“Wilshire”), while the Acquiring ETF will be sub-advised by Los Angeles Capital Management LLC (“Los Angeles Capital”).
Los Angeles Capital is an SEC-registered asset manager based in Santa Monica, California, with $28 billion in assets under management as of December 31, 2022. Formed in 2002 by former Wilshire employees, Los Angeles Capital is independent and employee owned. Founding members include Tom Stevens CFA, Chairman; Hal Reynolds CFA, Chief Investment Officer; Stuart Matsuda, Chief Trading Officer; and Daniel Allen CFA, CEO & President. The portfolio managers of the Acquiring ETF will be Hal Reynolds CFA, Ed Rackham Ph.D., and Daniel Arche CFA.
1
Prior to the Reorganization, Wilshire will continue to sub-advise the Target Fund in accordance with its investment goal and principal investment strategies.
You can obtain a copy of the prospectus or SAI for the Acquiring ETF, by visiting the website at TouchstoneInvestments.com/ETFs, by calling (833) 368-7383, or by contacting your financial adviser.
The foregoing is not an offer to sell, nor a solicitation of an offer to buy, any shares in connection with the Reorganization, nor is it a solicitation of any proxy. For important information regarding the Funds, or to receive a free copy of the Proxy Statement, please contact your financial adviser or Touchstone at 800.543.0407. The Proxy Statement contains important information about Fund goals, strategies, fees, expenses, risks, and the Board's considerations in approving the Reorganization. The Proxy Statement is also available for free on the SEC's website (www.sec.gov). Please read the Proxy Statement carefully before voting on the Reorganization.
 
* * * * * 
Please contact your financial adviser or Touchstone at 800.543.0407 if you have any questions.
P.O. Box 534467 Pittsburgh, PA 15253-4467
Ph: 800.543.0407 TouchstoneInvestments.com
Touchstone Mutual Funds are distributed by Touchstone Securities, Inc.*
*A registered broker-dealer and member FINRA and SIPC
A Member of Western & Southern Financial Group
Please retain this Supplement for future reference.
 
TSF-54CC-TST-TSMAX-S15-2309
 
2

15% - VDADX
15% - VTSAX
70 % - t-bill ladder
*3-month 20% 6-month 25%; 1-year; 25%

What I meant to ask @Baseball_Fan (and forgot to) is:
”What’s different about this particular $100,000 compared to all your other invested money?”
Anyway, @Gary1952 was very emphatic and precise (all capital letters) earlier and specified that that the amount had to be exactly $100,000 and that it had to be ”NOW”.*
I therefore rewrote my earlier submission(s), adding the exact date / time of day / amount ($100,000) and broke every investment down to the exact penny. As far as I know, I’m the only one who met or exceeded this requirement. I hope my effort may serve as an exemplar model for FD1000 and others to follow.
*“While to us it seems that time (“NOW”) is absolute, it is not. The measure of time will differ depending on what sources of gravity are nearby and the relative speeds of the clock being measured and the observer.”
https://prancer.physics.louisville.edu/modules/time/index.html

Well, again, it depends on someone's age, goals, and risk.
I know the following several investors
1) 90+% in Munis: This guy sold his company in the 90s for several million and since then he is in 90+% muni, the rest in stocks.
2) 90+% in CD: This guy has "only" one million
3) 85% in stocks: This guy has over 10 million and has been invested like this for decades and is now at retirement.
4) This guy shorted the market, but only at 2-3%.
5) This couple in their 80s invested it all in stocks since retirement in their early 60s. Why? because their pension + SS is over $25K per month.
6) Several investors in their 30s are all at high% in stocks
As you can see numbers 3,5 and 6 are invested highly in stocks but are different. Each of the above has a unique case.
Without the right context(age, goals, and risk), you can't learn much in depth. Even that isn't enough. Suppose someone says, I like treasuries right now. Well, what % do you own? is it 5% or 20%? The % you committed to anything you posted you own makes a difference.
$100K out of 10 mill is only 1%. I doubt this investor would make any significant change to her portfolio. A $100K to someone without saving matters a lot more than the 10 mill.
Lastly, when I read dtconroe's post I got the context pretty well.

Doesn't really matter at all how it affects anything. It is HOW YOU WOULD invest it. If I had $10m I would go buy something nice.
C'mon FD....you never once said how YOU would invest it.

First, If you burn stuff to make solar cells, it takes a year or so of their operation to zero out the CO2 impact of the manufacturing. After that, it's all benefit, in terms of limiting GHGs, which is the point. I looked into that aspect before installing a home PV system in 2015.
Second, Racq, does your point about recycling metals accomplishing little in energy conservation take into account the energy it takes to mine new metals? I've seen analyses that conclude recycling is beneficial if you include the alternative costs of mining new metals.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355064/000158064223004856/alphacentric_485a.htm
new name: AlphaCentric Strategic Real Estate Income Fund

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/811030/000089418923006946/ottercreek497e2023.htm
Otter Creek Long/Short Opportunity Fund
(the “Fund”)
Institutional Class – Ticker: OTTRX
Investor Class – Ticker: OTCRX
Supplement dated September 11, 2023 to the Prospectus and
Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”), each dated February 28, 2023
Otter Creek Advisors, LLC, (the “Advisor), the investment advisor to the Fund, regrets to inform the Fund’s shareholders that Keith Long, co-founder and a principal of the Advisor and a portfolio manager of the Fund, died on August 21, 2023. As of his passing, Mr. Long ceased being a principal of the Advisor and a portfolio manager of the Fund. All references to Keith Long in the Prospectus and SAI are hereby removed.
* * * * *
Please retain this supplement for your reference.
Obituary:
https://www.palmbeachpost.com/obituaries/pwpb0562250

I am curious of whether lithium-based batteries can be recycled or is it economical?

Hi @Sven, the site Electrek has a few articles on recycling Li and other EV battery metals. Here's one: "North America’s first battery-grade recycling hub just scored a $375M loan." (See the comments: a couple of people are arguing that this company, Li-Cycle, isn't the first.)

Exploring for Lithium seems like our modern day "gold rush".
LAC = Lithium Americas Corp and trade on the NYSE. GM (General Motors) owns 10% and is its largest holder of stock.
FifthDelta Ltd (a Hedge Fund?) is LAC next largest stockholder. Interestingly, FifthDelta is the largest stock holder of Blackberry. Here's some of their other holdings.
https://whalewisdom.com/filer/fifthdelta-ltd
Lithium News
Yahoo Finance News:
colossal-cache-lithium-found-us

McDermitt Caldera (Nevada/Oregon Border) was formed after a massive magma eruption approximately 16.4 million years ago, dredging up untold scores of lithium and other metals. A lake eventually inhabited the caldera, which deposited a layer of sediment spliced with the lithium that today is over 600 feet deep. The result: a clay called smectite.
But that was just the first lithium injection. Eventually, as volcanic activity heated up again, hot brine containing additional lithium was driven up into the existing smectite, infusing it with even more of it. Now, the clay was no longer just smectite, but a uniquely lithium-rich illite.
"They seem to have hit the sweet spot where the clays are preserved close to the surface, so they won't have to extract as much rock, yet it hasn't been weathered away yet," Borst told Chemistry World.
This is good news for miners. Not only is this particular illite more rich in the metal, it's supposedly easier to separate. Plus, the deposits are mostly concentrated in one spot at the southern tip of the pass, limiting the area impacted by mining.
At least in theory. The extraction of lithium can, depending on the methods used, emit vast amounts of CO2, contaminate groundwater with dangerous heavy metals, and guzzle tons of fossil fuels. Its environmental toll shouldn't be overlooked in the rush to green transportation infrastructure.

From Science Advances (In depth Article):
https://science.org

This back-of-the-envelope estimation is calculated using caldera-wide extrapolation of publicly available drill hole data from Lithium Americas Corp. and Jindalee Resources Ltd. and is not a reporting code-compliant mineral resource estimate that considers economic viability. Even if this estimation is high due to variations in sediment thickness and/or Li grade, the Li inventory contained in McDermitt caldera sediments would still be on par with, if not considerably larger than, the 10.2 MT of Li inventory estimated to be contained in brines beneath the Salar de Uyuni in Bolivia (12), previously considered the largest Li deposit on Earth.

The areas of Engineering, Science and Technology are long term themes in my investment portfolio.
Research is the cornerstone to the development of innovation in these fields.
I came across this link (see below) to the “investment strategy” of a US agency (DARPA) that has been partially responsible for:

Originally known as the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), the agency was created on February 7, 1958, by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in response to the Soviet launching of Sputnik 1 in 1957. By collaborating with academia, industry, and government partners, DARPA formulates and executes research and development projects to expand the frontiers of technology and science, often beyond immediate U.S. military requirements.
The Economist has called DARPA the agency "that shaped the modern world," and said that "Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine sits alongside weather satellites, GPS, drones, stealth technology, voice interfaces, the personal computer and the internet on the list of innovations for which DARPA can claim at least partial credit."

What STEM innovations will be next?
https://darpa.mil/our-research

Well, again, it depends on someone's age, goals, and risk.
I know the following several investors
1) 90+% in Munis: This guy sold his company in the 90s for several million and since then he is in 90+% muni, the rest in stocks.
2) 90+% in CD: This guy has "only" one million
3) 85% in stocks: This guy has over 10 million and has been invested like this for decades and is now at retirement.
4) This guy shorted the market, but only at 2-3%.
5) This couple in their 80s invested it all in stocks since retirement in their early 60s. Why? because their pension + SS is over $25K per month.
6) Several investors in their 30s are all at high% in stocks
As you can see numbers 3,5 and 6 are invested highly in stocks but are different. Each of the above has a unique case.
Without the right context(age, goals, and risk), you can't learn much in depth. Even that isn't enough. Suppose someone says, I like treasuries right now. Well, what % do you own? is it 5% or 20%? The % you committed to anything you posted you own makes a difference.
$100K out of 10 mill is only 1%. I doubt this investor would make any significant change to her portfolio. A $100K to someone without saving matters a lot more than the 10 mill.
Lastly, when I read dtconroe's post I got the context pretty well.

Grantham has been wrong for over 10 years, but, as usual, scary stories sell a lot more.
Who is going to read an interview with someone who says: I don't know what stocks will do in the next 3-6-12 months because nobody does, and BTW, the SP500 was up over 80% since 1980?
Sure, if someone has been a bear on US stocks since 2010, he will be right sometimes but he missed an unbelievable performance.
Since I have a special place for Grantham, I kept several of his past great calls.
==============
2010 (link)
"Over the next seven years, GMO forecasts large-cap U.S. stocks to deliver a real return (after inflation) of 1.3% annually, while small-caps provide a 0.5% return."
"International stocks also fare reasonably well in GMO's model, up about 4.7%, while emerging markets come in with a 3.9% annualized gain."
FD: reality(link): SPY made 14.4%...IWM 11.9%...EEM 3%. One of the worse misses in the history of predictions.
=====================
10/2012 (link) Jeremy Grantham Warns 2013 Will Be A Dangerous Year For Stocks:
FD: The SP500 made over 32%
=================
2015 (link) GMO's Jeremy Grantham has a relatively gloomy outlook for the markets and economy.
FD: Wrong again and again and again. Why does anybody ask his opinion?

@Gary1952- I think that there's a good chance that you're right on that.